Animated Series

Should i buy the animated series or is it an unnecessary addition to my collection (i notice there isn't a section on here for discussing the animnated series) but some of it clearly is canon such as Kirks middle name and i think there's a few facts about Vulcan that came from the series

I'm tempted because many see it as the 4th season to the original series and the fact that most of the cast came back to do the voices for it, makes me think it's probably worth having

I know the animation isn't that brilliant but are the stories any good

It was actually the thing that I watched the most of Classic Trek wise when it aired in the UK in the mid 90s. Other than that I was always just the films and TNG onwards. I know the studios don't consider it canon, but I've wondered how much was actually contradicted. I read one of IDW's TOS series and they had Arex in it, and I loved that TAS put two very alien looking characters on the bridge, even if one of those was a cat lady.

Some of the stories are good, one or two are very good, and some of them are goofy. It was aimed at kids but the writers and producers tried to raise it above that level. I think most of us consider at least "Yesteryear", the story of Spock's childhood, to be canon-worthy.

This set, which can now be picked up for around 20-25 bucks is worth it. While not a fan of Filmation's animation, myself, the stories make up for it. When I put a disc in now, I prefer just listening to it and imagining the scenes. If you do pick it up - make sure you watch the bonus features - they are very good.

It is coming to Bluray sometime soon, so you may want to wait, since you have waiting this long. I was hoping someone/company would do a ReAnimated version, using the original audio tracks, and updating it with fun modern animation.

Some fans have started, but I think that would be a fun project. I would love to work on/see that happen.

I know the studios don't consider it canon, but I've wondered how much was actually contradicted.

Click to expand...

No more than how the other Trek series' contradict each other (see the videos in my sig for some examples)

Of the top of my head, "The Magicks of Megas Tu" directly contradicts Star Trek V: The Final Frontier (in the former, the Enterprise explores the centre of the galaxy, in the latter "no one has ever made it to the centre of the galaxy") and "The Slaver Weapon", being a Trekified rewrite of the Known Space short story "The Soft Weapon", doesn't fit with the modern Trek chronology. Sulu talks about four Man/Kzin wars, the last of which was 200 years prior to the episode - which would be about the time of Star Trek: First Contact.

There have been some huge nods to TOS in live-action Trek:
The young Spock scenes from 2009's Star Trek were based on those in "Yesteryear" - some parts copied word-for-word.

The Sehlat seen in "Yesteryear" would be mentioned in, and then crop up, in Star Trek: Enterprise.

Kor's old ship which he talks about in Deep Space Nine is the Klothos, from the animated episode "The Time Trap"

I read one of IDW's TOS series and they had Arex in it, and I loved that TAS put two very alien looking characters on the bridge, even if one of those was a cat lady.

Click to expand...

Also, Arex and M'Ress, transplanted to the 24th century, have been a part of Peter David's Star Trek: New Frontier novel series since the late 90's.

TAS is a mixed bag. There are some high points (Yesteryear) and some low points (The Infinite Vulcan), and a lot of stuff in-between. If you are a compleatist, you'll want it. If not you might decide to skip this one.

King Daniel said:

The Sehlat seen in "Yesteryear" would be mentioned in, and then crop up, in Star Trek: Enterprise.

Click to expand...

Spock's childhood pet sehlat was fist mentioned in the TOS episode Journey to Babel. TAS is just being consistent with TOS here. Since both episodes were written by D.C. Fontana, this is not a surprise, I guess

I'm amazed that this myth persists. It hasn't been true for over two decades.

What happened was that in 1989, Gene Roddenberry issued a memo which basically declared that the animated series wasn't part of the canon. That was his personal preference, and it was binding as long as he was the one running the show. But then, in 1991, Roddenberry died, and his preference for how to treat TAS ceased to be binding the moment that happened. There have been a number of references to ideas from TAS in subsequent canon, as early as "Unification" referencing the events of "Yesteryear."

True, there are a few TAS episodes that have been contradicted by later works, like "The Magicks of Megas-tu" and "The Slaver Weapon." But then, there are live-action movies and films that have also been contradicted. The way "The Alternative Factor" portrayed antimatter and dilithium has been contradicted by all subsequent and prior references to those substances. VGR: "Threshold" has been officially declared apocryphal by its own writers. VGR: "Fury" made claims about the difficulty of changing course at warp which, again, all prior and subsequent Trek has contradicted. And the ease of travel to the center of the galaxy in both "Megas-tu" and The Final Frontier has been contradicted by DS9 and VGR. Any long-running canon ignores or contradicts earlier parts of itself eventually.

Not to mention that TAS is fully included on Memory Alpha as part of the canon material rather than as apocrypha, and it's counted on Startrek.com along with the other series and films. And nobody's kept the tie-in novels, comics, and computer games from referencing TAS for a long time now; indeed, such references have only been getting more frequent in the past few years.

So the studio doesn't treat TAS any differently than it treats any other Trek series. And really, it's not the studio's place to say anyway. They don't care from canon, they just want to make money. It's the current creators of new screen material who define what counts and what doesn't. That's why Roddenberry's opinion was law so long as he was the showrunner, and why it stopped applying when he died and his successors started working in TAS nods here and there. As for the current creators of screen material, they practically remade scenes from "Yesteryear" in the first act of the 2009 movie, so that makes their stance pretty clear.

I'm amazed that this myth persists. It hasn't been true for over two decades.

What happened was that in 1989, Gene Roddenberry issued a memo which basically declared that the animated series wasn't part of the canon. That was his personal preference, and it was binding as long as he was the one running the show. But then, in 1991, Roddenberry died, and his preference for how to treat TAS ceased to be binding the moment that happened. There have been a number of references to ideas from TAS in subsequent canon, as early as "Unification" referencing the events of "Yesteryear."

True, there are a few TAS episodes that have been contradicted by later works, like "The Magicks of Megas-tu" and "The Slaver Weapon." But then, there are live-action movies and films that have also been contradicted. The way "The Alternative Factor" portrayed antimatter and dilithium has been contradicted by all subsequent and prior references to those substances. VGR: "Threshold" has been officially declared apocryphal by its own writers. VGR: "Fury" made claims about the difficulty of changing course at warp which, again, all prior and subsequent Trek has contradicted. And the ease of travel to the center of the galaxy in both "Megas-tu" and The Final Frontier has been contradicted by DS9 and VGR. Any long-running canon ignores or contradicts earlier parts of itself eventually.

Not to mention that TAS is fully included on Memory Alpha as part of the canon material rather than as apocrypha, and it's counted on Startrek.com along with the other series and films. And nobody's kept the tie-in novels, comics, and computer games from referencing TAS for a long time now; indeed, such references have only been getting more frequent in the past few years.

So the studio doesn't treat TAS any differently than it treats any other Trek series. And really, it's not the studio's place to say anyway. They don't care from canon, they just want to make money. It's the current creators of new screen material who define what counts and what doesn't. That's why Roddenberry's opinion was law so long as he was the showrunner, and why it stopped applying when he died and his successors started working in TAS nods here and there. As for the current creators of screen material, they practically remade scenes from "Yesteryear" in the first act of the 2009 movie, so that makes their stance pretty clear.

Should i buy the animated series or is it an unnecessary addition to my collection. ... I know the animation isn't that brilliant but are the stories any good
thoughts

Click to expand...

Based on my recollection: No, TAS isn't necessary. The animation wasn't great but was standard for the day. The most irratating feature for me was the voice acting. It was like they recorded their parts one line at a time with no real context and then mixed & matched later. Performances came across as very subdued and wooden.

Should i buy the animated series or is it an unnecessary addition to my collection (i notice there isn't a section on here for discussing the animnated series) but some of it clearly is canon such as Kirks middle name and i think there's a few facts about Vulcan that came from the series

I'm tempted because many see it as the 4th season to the original series and the fact that most of the cast came back to do the voices for it, makes me think it's probably worth having

I know the animation isn't that brilliant but are the stories any good

thoughts

Click to expand...

The show is quite decent. There are some great episodes, and you get to see your favorite Trek characters animated.
Amazon.uk has it for £13 used, so I would consider that a worthwhile investment for any Star Trek fan.

In some cases, that's what happened. Lines were sometimes recorded alone in hotel rooms and sent in.

Click to expand...

I think the claims that they recorded them in hotel rooms or whatever may have been exaggerated. I gather they just went to the nearest convenient recording studio. Still, it does come pretty close to a case of the actors literally phoning in their parts. The lack of direction did hurt their performances.

But I think this was largely a function of the insanely tight deadline the network insisted on, resulting in a very rushed production for the first 16-episode season. The final 6 episodes, which were made on a more reasonable schedule, are more polished as a result, both in performance and in animation.

I love TAS. It was actually the thing that I watched the most of Classic Trek wise when it aired in the UK in the mid 90s. Other than that I was always just the films and TNG onwards.

Click to expand...

Same here! In fact, those mid 90s repeats could have been one of my earliest introductions to the world of TOS, long before I ever got to see the live action series or the movies.

As for the frequent complaints -- sure, the animation was occasionally dodgy, but I'd argue no less so than most TV cartoons of the seventies. There was a lot of cutting corners in those days right across the board. But in my estimation, TAS is just made of win. How could it not be? It's essentially 22 extra episodes of TOS complete with the original actors. I love the way Filmation put real attention to detail in, too. Oh sure, there are pink Tribbles and other occasional errors, but I love how for example the Enterprise fly-bys were done by actually taking stock footage from TOS and rotoscoping. Or that the interior sets of the Enterprise are basically identical to the ones seen in TOS. Little details mean a lot, and TAS really does strive to be faithful to its parent live action series for the most part. That it has been so neglected within the fandom for so long is regrettable.

As for the frequent complaints -- sure, the animation was occasionally dodgy, but I'd argue no less so than most TV cartoons of the seventies. There was a lot of cutting corners in those days right across the board.

Click to expand...

Indeed, while Filmation's animation (the actual movement of things) was about as limited and repetitive as it got in '70s cartoons, the quality of their artwork was above average for the period. Look at shows from their main competitor Hanna-Barbera in the same period and the animation and background paintings tended to be rather sloppier and rougher. Filmation shows may not have had much motion, but they looked good.

But in my estimation, TAS is just made of win. How could it not be? It's essentially 22 extra episodes of TOS complete with the original actors. I love the way Filmation put real attention to detail in, too. Oh sure, there are pink Tribbles and other occasional errors, but I love how for example the Enterprise fly-bys were done by actually taking stock footage from TOS and rotoscoping. Or that the interior sets of the Enterprise are basically identical to the ones seen in TOS. Little details mean a lot, and TAS really does strive to be faithful to its parent live action series for the most part. That it has been so neglected within the fandom for so long is regrettable.

Click to expand...

Indeed. It was made by people who were big fans of the original show. And of course it was story-edited by D.C. Fontana, and about half its episodes were written by veterans of the original series (well, 10 if you limit it only to TOS writers, 12 if you include the ones written by Walter Koenig and TOS director Marc Daniels). It's as authentic a continuation as we could possibly have gotten in animation. The other studios that made proposals for an animated ST all wanted to add kid sidekicks and cute alien mascots and just generally turn it into a stock kids' cartoon. But the show we got, other than toning down the sex and violence, strove to tell the same kind of stories that TOS had told, albeit with unlimited freedom to create exotic aliens and settings.